May 27, 2009

An emailer calls this to my attention saying: "I don't think you should post about this, but why would they put in this photo where you can see all the way up her skirt??"

Well, I am posting about this, and I wouldn't say "you can see all the way up her skirt." You can see that Sonia Sotomayor wears a skirt and crosses her legs in a relaxed and casual way that lets you see some leg. The photo also has her smiling prettily, with her hair in relaxed ringlets, one of which falls gently into her eye. Her left hand is devoid of any relationship-manifesting rings, but she's wearing long dangling earrings, and the hand is unclenched and draping gracefully.

Get the message? She's a woman. A womanly woman, fully embodying womanhood — even as she is not married, she's wearing a professional suit, and she's at home with the law books.

IN THE COMMENTS: Palladian, who has expertise in art, writes:

Her knee looks like a giant grey Idaho potato hovering in the foreground. The arm of the chair repeats the shape on the right of the frame, making it look like her other knee, which in turn makes it look like her hand is dead center in her enormous crotch, pawing at her cooch. You avoid those things in portraiture. Also not good to crop her right arm off. It implies that she's an amputee.

He is right, of course, but that isn't the answer to my question why the photograph was selected.

ALSO IN THE COMMENTS: Andrew Koenig said:

My first thought was of this famous picture of J.P. Morgan...

... in which the light reflecting from the arm of his chair makes him seem to be holding a dagger.

The photo is by Edward Steichen. The effect was accidental, but in this case, we love it (as much as Morgan hated it). The important thing is to have an eye not just for what you are hoping to capture in a photograph — such as Sotomayor's femininity — but also for the accidental imagery that others may notice. See what can be seen and then decide if you want to use a photograph.

114 comments:

So she's a woman. What does that have to do with?...oh, I get it...empathy. She feels. With one exception: the dreaded white heterosexual male. That bastard doesn't deserve her feelings. And good on him!

I would argue that the photo shows that the law is no longer a serious profession and that Sotomayer/Obama represents the flowering of a new era - the age of empathy.

Is the age of reason, the one established by the founders, who suffered through the times of religious tyranny, now coming to an end? I think yes. IN fact the complacency of living under the rule of law has allowed tyranny to rise again.

This new idea of ruling based on "empathy" is little different than the tyrannic rule by kings and the clergy from the middle ages. It is based soley on the opinion of men and/or women who occupy positions of power. They are not bound by the law, but bound by whim. Obama/Sotomayer of course rationalize this new era by arguing that legal equality occurs across generations. In otherwords they rationalize that it is fair to treat some groups differently today because they may have been treated differently 100 years ago.

Obama's actions thus far with the economy respresent this new era. His quest to disregard the law with the Chrysler bond holders, with the bail-outs etc.., are manifestations of Obama's casual disregard of the rule of law.

There is much more to come from Obama's new "government by empathy." I suspect at some point, Obama will take it too far an personally disregard the law himself as Nixon or Clinton did. We will know we are in the new era when Obama gets a free pass.

Her knee looks like a giant grey Idaho potato hovering in the foreground. The arm of the chair repeats the shape on the right of the frame, making it look like her other knee, which in turn makes it look like her hand is dead center in her enormous crotch, pawing at her cooch. You avoid those things in portraiture. Also not good to crop her right arm off. It implies that she's an amputee.

I see the same things. She may be the first whole woman on the Court. Her talents are not limited to being a female who has the same intellectual, and over-educated,mindset as the men on the Court. I am also fascinated at reactions from liberal intellectuals who are against her for a basically false premise that she is "unqualified".What they mean is that she has a skill set beyond theirs that they don't want to have to deal with.

Can we please ban the barbaric use of the term "latina" and "latino". The English language stopped using male and female endings sometime in the middle ages. She is an American who was born in Puerto Rico.

So when Palin or Jindal nominates Althouse for the Supreme Court, is that the way you want us to depict you for your rollout picture to the Nation, Ann? Nice and Womanly, in an attractive and approachable way? Yet with a battery of law books in the back to describe seriousness of purpose.

With a fetching and exposed knee, as opposed to the Pantsuit and Sandals of the Earnest Law Professor?

We will know more about her temperament soon. She seems to me to have a high emotional IQ to go along with a fine legal mind. As a traditionalist, I have learned that being able to admit when you are wrong is one sign of a mature person. Either Rush or myself will have to admit we were wrong about this Lady soon.

If we now require judges that have life experience rather than intellectual skill, shouldn't we make sure that they have a full life experience.

Sotomayer is a single hispanic woman with no kids. She has spent the last 35 years, 70% of her life, hobnobbing in ivy league schools and hanging out with intellectuals at coffee shops never going through the emotional roller coaster of being a mother or a wife.

Im not sure, but I think not raising any kids or having never been married, is a pretty big strike against you when it comes to "life-experience."

"She seems to me to have a high emotional IQ to go along with a fine legal mind."

I will give you the IQ part based on her academic record. But what makes you say she has a high emotional IQ? The reports of her clerks seem to indicate the opposite. What specific evidence do you have to contradict that other than she happens to agree with you about things?

"If you're seeing amputee porn in that pic you need to seriously take a time out and check yourself."

Visual artists notice the implications of visual choices. I would expect a professional photographer on that level to have the same outstanding visual and compositional acuity, especially a photographer for the supposedly sophisticated imagists in the Obama Administration.

I wouldn't expect you to notice anything amiss, because that requires sensitivity, a critical eye and an uncompromising aesthetic. You display little sensitivity to anything except slights against your party and little critical ability in neither eye nor brain. And you're hardly uncompromising. In fact, you've been nothing but compromise since Hillary got horsewhipped.

"Im not sure, but I think not raising any kids or having never been married, is a pretty big strike against you when it comes to "life-experience."

But no one held that against Souter. I don't think that is a fair standard. I don't care that she is single. That is her business. I care that she thinks that Puerto Ricans are somehow automatically smarter and more deserving than anyone else.

John: I have no evidence about her yet, and neither do any other commenters here so far. I do admire her style and her family background. The "emotional IQ" means her ability to successfully interract with persons emotionally. That is a missing skill in many thinking centered people. I also suspect that she has enemies from being a strong and highly successful person, like all such people have. Anyway, I would not Bork her based on the "charges" against her alone.

Yes. There are some non-paralell nouns left. They are leftovers from Norman French. Last I looked the feminists, of with Sotomayor no doubt considers herself, have spent the last 40 years trying to stricken those from the language.

It is not a bad photograph. It makes her look relaxed and has the typical lawyer stuff like law books in the background. It does emphasize her as a woman. No disagreement with our host's assessment.

But it is boring too. The WH should have thrown in some winter trees, a reflection on a Wisconsin pond, or changed the setting to a quirky restaurant and a steaming cup of coffee to give the photo an Althouse edge.

"Anyway, I would not Bork her based on the "charges" against her alone."

I wouldn't either. But I have a sense of decency. I don't think what your law clerks wisper to some hack in TNR should determine if you get on the court. What makes me angry is that everyone knows liberals would do exactly that if she were a conservative. Given that fact, I frankly see no reason for conservatives to play fairly with her.

But no one held that against Souter. I don't think that is a fair standard. I don't care that she is single. That is her business. I care that she thinks that Puerto Ricans are somehow automatically smarter and more deserving than anyone else.Except Souter was not chosen for his life experience and ability to identify with certain groups. He was chosen because of his legal mind to apply the law and interpret the constitution. If you are choosing someone for their legal mind it should not matter if they are single have kids, are black ,white, male, female, etc..

At first, I thought Dear Althouse! Why are you giving credence to a trollish comment? Then I realized that Palladian was totally telling the truth. It is like that old optical illusion of the beautiful young lady and the crone (or "faces or vases?). This picture can be looked at both ways-each equally true.

"No one held it against Souter? You're wrong. Orrin Hatch said he'd prefer a family man."

I had forgotten that Ann. But was Hatch really being fair to Souter? I don't think so. I will be the first to admit Souter was a lousy justice. But, the fact that he is single and lives with his mother had nothing to do with it.

Sleights against my party? Haha. If you mean Democrats outside of a handful they are completely worthless to causes I care about. That doesn't mean I can't poke fun of someone who think that picture is unintentional amputee pr0n.

So what? Everytime I go into a store and see "10 items or less" rather than "10 items of fewer" it grates my nerves there to. Lots of people misuse the language. But that doesn't make it correct. .

Well one is grammatically incorrect and the other simply offends your sensibilities. Sorry but I can't get worked up over the word Latino or Latina when the very people who should be offended are using it as a term of identification.

"Well one is grammatically incorrect and the other simply offends your sensibilities. Sorry but I can't get worked up over the word Latino or Latina when the very people who should be offended are using it as a term of identification."

I am sorry but it offends me when non-native speakers corrupt our langauge. Further, you should be offended by the appalling double standard even if you don't care about the language. Acress is now sexist, but Latina is okay because cute brown people use the word.

In the 500 years of New World hispanic culture there were always many distinctions made about the degree of direct descent from the aristocracy of Spain. The higher classes were always very well educated. So I don't knee jerk equate Hispanic with peasants from Mexico. Whatever the truth is about the Soto-mayor family, I do to see a woman who values education, as her mother and brother do, and having thereby earned great self respect, which also tells me she will likely show respect the US Constitution.

"So I don't knee jerk equate Hispanic with peasants from Mexico. Whatever the truth is about the Soto-mayor family, I do to see a woman who values education, as her mother and brother do, and having thereby earned great self respect, which also tells me she will likely show respect the US Constitution."

Yes because educated people have over the centuries shown so much respect for human rights. Intellectuals have never adopted crazy, utopian ideas that resulted in the deaths of millions or anything. Are you kidding?

Sloanasaurus at 9:37am said: Im not sure, but I think not raising any kids or having never been married, is a pretty big strike against you when it comes to "life-experience."

Also troubling to me is the fact that although Sotomayor earns more than $175,000 a year now and has worked at a law firm as well as other significant government jobs, she has essentially NO savings or investments. Since she has no children and no obvious expenses other than herself, I wonder why and how she spends most of her take home pay. Would she have empathy for those of us who must live on much less income or who save and scrimp to send children to private colleges? and still manage to save and invest?

John...You are speaking about Obama and not Judge Sotomayor,I presume. If we later find a Che Poster on her wall, then you may be right. But watch out for photo-shopped images replacing the Case books with a Castro like setting. She will have a lifetime appointment, and the Progressives will be the most suprised by her, I predict.

Spending all of your net income on a $175,000 salary living in NYC? Anyone could easily do that. It's no special profligacy. Get a 1 bedroom apartment in a good neighborhood, buy the clothes you need for work, go out to dinner a couple times a week, travel for a few weeks a year in the style that is needed for reasonable comfort when you are an older woman traveling alone, buy some Christmas and birthday presents for family, take cabs to get around the city... and you'll go through all that money, I bet.

And "all that money" is no longer hers, at least according to the Democrats.

It's the government's for the taking. You are permitted to buy trinkets and doodads with what's left over after funding national health care, GM, Chrysler, a $billion a day on something or other, universal pre-K, education K-12, college funding, welfare, and Social Security.

The mold is set by Obama that property is not among your rights. Marriage maybe, not property; at least not anymore.

Palladian said... I love when hdhouse criticizes someone else's writing ability and lack of gentility. I LOLed..... and later he added....Nosing around in someone's personal finances is a Democrat sort of thing to do."

as to point one, your writing ability is fair to midline and you are still crude no matter how you slice it.

as to the little cutie barb about Democrat/personal finances....1. I do remember the past administration pawing through bank accounts as part of "keeping us safe" (from?) and the republicans are the last group on earth to point that finger.

Shocking! Even worse is the portrait that other lawyer lady, the one just to the right. The way that woman's hair is cut and the angle of her head are reminiscent of the knob end of a tumescent prong. Extremely suggestive....

JP Morgan was also famously shy about his large acne'd nose. And was reportedly most upset with the photo because it displayed his schnozz as the center, most luminous object in the picture.

But a better man than the "capitalism is evil" branch of historians and textbook editors give him credit for.

One new secretary warned for months that the magnate occasionally visited the workplaces of the office help outside Manhattan was warned repeatedly by her boss and co-workers "Don't look at JP Morgan's big ugly nose if he shows up. Remember!"

So when JP arrived one day, in tophat and surrounded by a swarm of syncophant managers and lawyers and encountered that secretary, surprising her...all she could think to do was blurt out "Mr Morgan!" stand up immediately and timidly declare, "And I'm not looking at your big, ugly nose at all!" Morgan's face got red, he grunted, and walked away.

She thought she had committed career suicide by brain fart. So did her manager, who promply fired her and told her to gather her things while he drafted a pink slip and her last paycheck.

The manager took a long time. Finally, he reappeared with one of JP Morgan's lawyers who had a large bouquet. The manager said she was "unfired". The flowers were for her. With a note from JP. Paraphrasing: "It was somewhat enjoyable meeting you. Perhaps next time the conversation will take a different course. Meanwhile, keep working my accounts.."

(In his era, Morgan understood aspects of psychology very well. He knew that "big ugly nose" didn't come from her, but other office staff. That low-level employees habitually told not to do or say something in a potential future high stress situation will, reinforced again and again - frequently, in actual high stress remember and do the one thing they are told not to do. Reacting, do it reflexively.

The AF trained, as services are want to do, on mistakes that other service branches did. In ROTC, we learned that the 50s and 60s epidemic of Army people dropping grenades after pulling the pin was a function of poor management. Green soldiers were repeatedly told before 1st grenade practice how awful and lethal a grenade is and to NEVER EVER DROP IT after pulling the pin. DON'T DROP IT!! Pull the pin, DONT DROP IT!! and cast it with a smooth overhead motion.

And you can guess what certain freaked out recruits with two pounds of instant death in their hands did...And how the AF, being superior, avoided that by mentally imprinting IT'S soldiers with a simple "pull the pin and chuck it" message DECADES before the Army caught on to good MGMT theory.

-------------------Anyways, on the Sotomayor pic. I think it is bad because it has her all crinkle-beady eyes squinty - and her unadorned left hand is almost deliberately displayed as something as notable as her face..signalling she is proudly without a (Latino?) man and childless by choice.

I have a great deal of respect for Mr Morgan because of his love of books and art. He built one of world's most spectacular private libraries, which I urge anyone to visit when in New York, and he managed to scoop up vast amounts of great art, with a concentration on wonderful medieval art, at a time when Europeans were busy selling off everything that wasn't nailed down. He also was a founding member of the Metropolitan Museum of Art and his wonderful bequest, as well as his financial support made it into the great institution it is today.

I take it from this that in addition to the qualifications you mentioned, you also have two degrees from Ivy League colleges, have served as a prosecutor and been nominated by two presidents and confirmed both times by the Senate leading to 17 years as a federal judge.

If I were you, I would send my resume in to the White House right away.

Man, that community college creative writing course really opened up your talent.Ohh, snap!

I've never been to a community college and I'm pretty sure that I don't have any talents, other than pussy tickling. It's a personal thing for me, I just feel that 'tumescent prong' is less aggresive than 'fully loaded junket pumper' or 'blood engorged cock.'